Effect of cetirizine on bronchial hyperresponsiveness in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis and asthma

Although H1 antihistamine compounds (H1) are highly effective in the treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR), their role in the treatment of asthma is still controversial. Because a strong association between AR and bronchial hyperresponsiveness (BHR) has been reported, this study was designed to assess the effect of a new H1 anti histamine, cetirizine (C), on nonspecific BHR in patients with AR. Twelve patients were included in a double-blind, crossover, placebo-controlled trial. All patients had positive skin tests for common allergens and showed BHR to inhaled methacholine after specific nasal allergenic challenge. After a washout period of 1 week to ensure the stability of the BHR, the patients received, by crossover randomization, C 10 mg daily or placebo (P) for 2 weeks. After each treatment period, BHR and nasal blocking index (NBI) were measured 1 and 6 h after nasal challenge. Bronchial responsiveness was expressed as methacholine PD20, the provocation dose of methacholine causing a 20% decrease in FEV1. Measurements were then performed after 2 weeks of C and after 2 weeks of P. Baseline values of PD20 (median) measured before challenge showed no difference after cetirizine or after placebo (1.36 mg). Results 1 h after allergen did not show significant differences between C (methacholine PD20=0.522 mg) and placebo (methacholine PD20=0.455 mg). By contrast, 6 h after challenge, methacholine PD20 was 0.918 mg for C and 0.483 mg for P (P=0.042). Similarly, NBI showed no change between C and P 1 h after challenge, whereas the difference was significant 6 h after challenge (P=0.011 ). These data demonstrate a protective nasal effect of C against BHR measured 6 h after nasal allergen challenge in patients with AR. They suggest that C may be useful in patients with asthma associated with AR.     

The determinants of bronchial hyperresponsiveness in patients with allergic rhinitis.

BACKGROUND: Patients with allergic rhinitis and bronchial hyperresponsiveness (BHR) may be at higher risk of developing asthma. OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether reactivity to aeroallergens in skin prick testing (SPT) and serum eosinophil cationic protein levels can be used to predict BHR in allergic rhinitis patients. METHODS: Fifty-nine consecutive patients with allergic rhinitis underwent SPTs using grass, tree, weed, parietaria, Alternaria, Aspergillus, mites, and cat and dog dander extracts. Methacholine challenge tests were performed using spirometry. RESULTS: Methacholine-induced BHR was detected in 23 patients (39%). Of 59 patients, 14 had 1 positive SPT response, 35 had 2 to 4 positive responses, and 10 had more than 4 positive responses. There was a significant inverse correlation between methacholine provocation concentration that caused a decrease in forced expiratory volume in 1 second of 20% (PC20) and the number of positive SPT responses (r = -0.28; P = .03). The BHR-positive patients had a mean of 4 positive SPT responses, whereas BHR-negative patients had a mean of 2.6 (P = .04). Nine BHR-positive patients (39%) and only 1 BHR-negative patient (3%) had more than 4 positive SPT responses (P < .001). There was no correlation between serum eosinophil cationic protein levels and methacholine PC20 doses. There was a strong association between hyperresponsiveness to methacholine and both cat and dog dander sensitivity (P < .001 and P = .001, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Allergic rhinitis patients with SPT responses to a higher number of allergens are more likely to have BHR. Whether the number of positive SPT responses correlates with the risk of developing asthma in allergic rhinitis patients remains to be determined.     

Comparison of allergen-induced changes in bronchial hyperresponsiveness and airway inflammation between mildly allergic asthma patients and allergic rhinitis patients

Bronchial eosinophilic inflammation and bronchial hyperresponsiveness (BHR) are the main features of allergic asthma (AA), but they have also been demonstrated in allergic rhinitis (AR), suggesting a continuity between both diseases. In spite of not fully reproducing natural allergenic exposure, the allergen bronchial provocation test (A-BPT) has provided important knowledge of the pathophysiology of AA. Our aim was to verify the existence of a behavior of AA and AR airways different from the allergen bronchial challenge-induced airway eosinophilic inflammation and BHR changes. We studied a group of 31 mild and short-evolution AA and 15 AR patients, sensitized to Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus. The A-BPT was performed with a partially biologically standardized D. pteronyssinus extract, and known quantities of Der p 1 were inhaled. Peripheral blood (eosinophils and ECP) and induced sputum (percentage cell counts, ECP, albumin, tryptase, and interleukin [IL]-5) were analyzed, before and 24 h after A-BPT. Methacholine BHR, assessed before and 32 h after the A-BPT, was defined by M-PD20 values and, when possible, by maximal response plateau (MRP). The A-BPT was well tolerated by all the patients. AA presented a lower Der p 1 PD20 and a higher occurrence of late-phase responses (LPR). M-PD20 values decreased in AA, but not in AR, patients. MRP values increased in both groups. Eosinophils numbers and ECP levels increased in blood and sputum from both AA and AR, but only the absolute increment of sputum ECP levels was higher in AA than AR patients (P = 0.025). The A-BPT induced no change in sputum albumin, tryptase, or IL-5 values. We conclude as follows: 1) In spite of presenting a lower degree of bronchial sensitivity to allergen, AR patients responded to allergen inhalation with an eosinophilic inflammation enhancement very similar to that observed among AA. 2) MRP levels increased in both AA and AR patients after allergen challenge; however, M-PD20 values significantly changed only in the AA group, suggesting that the components of the airway response to methacholine were controlled by different mechanisms. 3) It is possible that the differences between AR and AA lie only in the quantitative bronchial response to allergen inhalation.     

Bacterial allergy in allergic rhinitis and bronchial asthma.

Nineteen patients suffering from allergic rhinitis and bronchial asthma were studied for bacterial allergy with Staphylococcus aureus, Kelbsiella pneumoniae and Diplococcus pneumoniae. Allergy skin tests, provocative tests and the Migratory Inhibition Factor were employed. The correlation indicates to the authors that bacterial allergy is more important than bacterial "infection" as a cause of allergic rhinitis and asthma in many instances. This is often overlooked by practicing allergists.     

A familial predisposition in bronchial hyperresponsiveness among patients with allergic rhinitis

Background: Nonasthmatic subjects with allergic rhinitis often have bronchial hyperresponsiveness (BHR). The mechanisms responsible for BHR in asthma include genetic predisposition and airway inflammation, but the causes of BHR in allergic rhinitis are poorly understood. Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate whether there is a familial predisposition in allergic rhinitis–associated BHR. Methods: One hundred fifteen children with allergic rhinitis (probands) and their family members underwent methacholine bronchial challenge and skin prick tests with airborne allergens. The probands were divided into 2 groups: BHR(+) (methacholine PC₂₀ <18 mg/mL determined by the dosimeter method; n = 42) and BHR(–) (n = 73). Results: The overall prevalence of BHR was higher in family members of BHR(+) probands than in those of BHR(–) probands (23.3% [27 of 116] vs 10.5% [21 of 200], P < .01). In mothers, this difference was marked (21.4% vs 8.2%, P < .05); a similar trend was observed in fathers (16.7% vs 6.8%) and siblings (34.4% vs 18.5%), although the differences did not reach significance (.05 < P < .1). The bronchial responsiveness index (BR index), a continuous variable derived from the results of methacholine challenge, was significantly higher among family members of the BHR(+) group than those of the BHR(–) group. Furthermore, even when only family members without BHR were considered, the BR index was significantly higher among those (n = 89) of the BHR(+) group than those (n = 179) of the BHR(–) group. There was no difference in atopic status as assessed by the prevalence of atopy (or atopy index) between family members of the BHR(+) group and the BHR(–) group. Conclusion: Our results indicated that there is a significant familial predisposition for BHR among patients with allergic rhinitis. Further studies are needed to elucidate whether genetic factors play a role in allergic rhinitis–associated BHR. (J Allergy Clin Immunol 1998;102:921-6.)     

The effect of astemizole on bronchial hyperresponsiveness and exercise-induced asthma in children

The ability of the new generation H1-receptor antagonist, astemizole, to prevent histamine-induced airway obstruction and exercise-induced asthma (EIA) was studied in 20 children with asthma. The study was a randomised clinically controlled trial of oral astemizole versus placebo in a cross-over study. In each of the two treatment periods the children were tested at days 0, 6, 15 and 22 of therapy. The two treatment periods were separated by a washout period of 50 days, and at each visit a bronchial challenge with increasing concentrations of histamine followed by an exercise test was performed, and peak flow and asthmatic symptom score were recorded daily. The children tolerated significantly higher mean concentrations of histamine when treated with astemizole compared with placebo (P less than 0.001). Astemizole postponed the response to exercise, but no change in the maximal response was found. No differences between the treatment periods were found regarding frequency of asthmatic symptoms or the daily recording of peak flow.     

Asymptomatic bronchial hyperresponsiveness in rhinitis

Methacholine inhalation tests are used to help in the diagnosis of asthma when spirometry is normal. However, the significance of increased methacholine responsiveness in patients with rhinitis and no symptoms of asthma is not known. One possibility is that it is a false positive result; another possibility is that it indicates subclinical asthma. We investigated these possibilities in 25 patients with rhinitis, whose attending physician had not made a diagnosis of asthma, by comparing responsiveness to methacholine expressed as the provocation concentration to cause a fall in FEV1 of 20% (PC20) with responsiveness to the natural stimulus of isocapnic hyperventilation of cold air and the diurnal variation of peak flow rate. Asthma was recognized objectively by variable airflow obstruction documented by one of the latter two tests. The PC20 ranged between 4 and greater than 64 mg/ml. In 10 patients the PC20 was less than 16 mg/ml. Five of these patients had bronchoconstriction in response to hyperventilation, and a further two patients demonstrated increased variability of peak flow rates. Thus, in seven of 10 patients, increased bronchial responsiveness was confirmed by the use of two different methods, although they were asymptomatic, and the increased response to methacholine was not a false positive result. In the remaining three patients the PC20 was borderline increased (8 to 16 mg/ml). The results indicate that methacholine responsiveness in the asthmatic range in patients with rhinitis is associated with variable airflow obstruction and subclinical asthma.     

Cost-effectiveness of specific subcutaneous immunotherapy in patients with allergic rhinitis and allergic asthma

BACKGROUND: Specific immunotherapy is the only potentially curative treatment in patients with allergic rhinitis and allergic asthma. Health economic evaluations on this treatment, particularly in a German context, are sparse. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of specific subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) in addition to symptomatic treatment (ST) compared with ST alone in a German health care setting. METHODS: The analysis was performed as a health economic model calculation based on Markov models. In addition, we performed a concomitant expert board composed of allergy experts in pediatrics, dermatology, pneumology, and otolaryngology. The primary perspective of the study was societal. Additional sensitivity analyses were performed to prove our results for robustness. RESULTS: The SCIT and ST combination was associated with annual cost savings of Euro140 per patient. After 10 years of disease duration, SCIT and ST reach the breakeven point. The overall incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was Euro-19,787 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), with a range that depended on patient age (adults, Euro-22,196; adolescents, Euro-14,747; children, Euro-12,750). From a third-party payer's perspective, SCIT was associated with slightly additional costs. Thus, the resulting ICER was Euro8,308 per QALY for all patients. CONCLUSIONS: Additional SCIT was associated with improved medical outcomes and cost savings compared with symptomatic treatment alone according to a societal perspective. Taking a European accepted ICER threshold of up to Euro50,000 per QALY into account, additional SCIT is considered clearly cost-effective compared with routine care in Germany. The degree of cost-effectiveness is strongly affected by costs related to SCIT and the target population receiving such treatment.     

Airway inflammation in asthma and perennial allergic rhinitis. Relationship with nonspecific bronchial responsiveness and maximal airway narrowing

BACKGROUND: Eosinophilic airway inflammation is the hallmark of asthma, but it has also been reported in other conditions such as allergic rhinitis. We have tested whether the analysis of cells and chemicals in sputum can distinguish between patients with mild allergic asthma, those with allergic rhinitis, and healthy controls. The relationship between inflammation markers in sputum and nonspecific bronchial hyperresponsiveness to methacholine (BHR) (PD20 and maximal response plateau [MRP] values) was also evaluated. METHODS: We selected 31 mild asthmatics and 15 rhinitis patients sensitized to house-dust mite. As a control group, we studied 10 healthy subjects. Every subject underwent the methacholine bronchial provocation test (M-BPT) and sputum induction. Blood eosinophils and serum ECP levels were measured. Sputum cell differentials were assessed, and eosinophil cationic protein (ECP), tryptase, albumin, and interleukin (IL)-5 levels were measured in the entire sputum supernatant. RESULTS: Blood eosinophils and serum ECP levels were higher in asthma patients and rhinitis than in healthy controls, but no difference between asthma patients and rhinitis patients was found. Asthmatics had higher eosinophil counts and higher ECP and tryptase levels in sputum than rhinitis patients or control subjects. Sputum albumin levels were higher in asthmatics than in controls. Rhinitis patients exhibited higher sputum eosinophils than healthy controls. An association between sputum eosinophil numbers and MPR values (r= -0.57) was detected, and a trend toward correlation between sputum ECP levels and PD20 values (r= -0.47) was found in the rhinitis group, but not in asthmatics. No correlation between blood eosinophilic inflammation and lung functional indices was found. CONCLUSIONS: Induced sputum is an accurate method to study bronchial inflammation, allowing one to distinguish between rhinitis patients and mildly asthmatic patients. The fact that no relationship was detected between sputum inflammation and BHR suggests that other factors, such as airway remodeling, may be at least partly responsible for BHR in asthma.     

The comparison of allergic responses to Dermatophagoides farinae between bronchial asthma and allergic rhinitis

The allergic responses of 52 bronchial asthma patients who exhibited a positive bronchoprovocation test with house dust and 50 allergic rhinitis patients who had positive RAST results to Dermatophagoides farinae (D. farinae) were studied, including the measurement of D. farinae-specific IgE using D. farinae-RAST, total IgE and skin reactivity to D. farinae and house dust. A comparison between the allergic rhinitis group in which methacholine PC20 was more than 4.66 mg/mL and the allergic rhinitis group which presented negative results in the methacholine bronchial challenge test, indicated that there were significant differences in skin test reactivity and the ratio of specific IgE to total IgE (P less than .05). The allergic responses we observed were not different between the allergic rhinitis group in which methacholine PC20 was less than 4.66 mg/mL (asthmatic range of methacholine PC20) and the allergic rhinitis group in which methacholine PC20 was more than 4.66 mg/mL. When comparing the bronchial asthma group which showed positive results in D. farinae-RAST and the allergic rhinitis group in which methacholine PC20 was less than 4.66 mg/mL, significant differences were noted in total IgE level (P less than .05). These findings suggest that the development of bronchial asthma in patients with allergic rhinitis might be predicted by measuring the degree of bronchial hyperreactivity and their allergic responses.     

Chemically induced nonspecific bronchial hyperresponsiveness

Conclusion In summary, it is clear that in some instances, inhalant exposure to irritating chemicals can result in nonspecific bronchial hyperresponsiveness. The physiologic mechanisms underlying the induction of nonspecific bronchial hyperresponsiveness in this setting are poorly understood. Although inflammation is the pathologic hallmark of nonspecific bronchial hyperresponsiveness in asthma, it has not been well demonstrated in chemically-induced nonspecific bronchial hyperresponsiveness. This article has highlighted the observation that despite the large number of individuals exposed to respiratory irritants in our society in and away from industrial settings, very few develop obvious nonspecific bronchial hyperresponsiveness. Further study is necessary in this important area.     

Nasal eosinophilic inflammation contributes to bronchial hyperresponsiveness in patients with allergic rhinitis

There are increasing evidences that allergic rhinitis (AR) may influence the clinical course of asthma. We conducted methacholine challenge test and nasal eosinophils on nasal smear to patients with allergic rhinitis in order to investigate the mechanism of connecting upper and lower airway inflammation in 35 patients with AR during exacerbation. The methacholine concentration causing a 20% fall in FEV1 (PC20) was used as thresholds of bronchial hyperresponsiveness (BHR). Thresholds of 25 mg/dL or less were assumed to indicate BHR. All patients had normal pulmonary function. Significant differences in BHR were detected in the comparison of patients with cough or postnasal drip and without cough or postnasal drip. There were significant differences of PC20 between patients with cough or postnasal drip and those without cough or postnasal drip (3.41+/-3.59 mg/mL vs 10.2+/-1.2 mg/mL, p=0.001). The levels of total IgE were higher in patients with seasonal AR than in patients with perennial AR with exacerbation (472.5+/-132.5 IU/L vs. 389.0+/-70.9 IU/L, p<0.05). Nasal eosinophils were closely related to log PC20 (r=-0.65, p<0.01). These findings demonstrated that nasal eosinophilic inflammation might contribute to BHR in patients with AR.     

Impact of allergic rhinitis on asthma: effects on bronchial hyperreactivity

Background:  Remarkable relationship exists between upper and lower airways. Bronchial hyperreactivity (BHR) is a paramount feature of asthma and may be considered a strong risk factor for the onset of asthma in patients with allergic rhinitis.
Objective:  This study is aimed at evaluating the presence of BHR in a large group of patients with moderate-severe persistent allergic rhinitis alone, and at investigating possible risk factors related to severe BHR.
Methods:  Three hundred and forty-two patients with moderate-severe persistent allergic rhinitis were prospectively and consecutively evaluated. Clinical examination, skin prick test, spirometry and bronchial methacholine (MCH) test were performed in all patients.
Results:  Twenty-two (6.4%) patients had severe BHR, 74 (21.6%) patients had mild BHR and 192 (56.2%) had borderline BHR; 54 (15.8%) patients had a negative MCH test. The logistic regression analysis evidenced that trees and house dust mites sensitization (OR_Adj: 8.1), rhinitis duration > 5 years (OR_Adj: 5.4) and FEV₁ ≤ 86% of predicted (OR_Adj: 4.0) were significantly associated with severe BHR. The discriminative ability of this model is appreciably satisfactory, being the AUC = 0.90.
Conclusion:  This study highlights the close link between upper and lower airways and the role of some risk factors, such as tree and mite sensitization, > 5-year duration, and ≤ 86% FEV₁ values, as risk factors for severe BHR in patients with moderate-severe persistent allergic rhinitis alone. Therefore, BHR is frequently present in patients with chronic rhinitis and should be suspected in the presence of defined risk factors.     

特异性免疫治疗对变应性鼻炎合并哮喘患儿的影响

目的: 探讨屋尘螨变应原特异性免疫治疗对变应性鼻炎合并哮喘患儿血清白细胞介素 13(IL-13)、白细胞介素 4(IL-4)、干扰素 γ(IFN-γ)水平及鼻部症状和肺功能的影响。方法: 选择屋尘螨变应原阳性的变应性鼻炎合并支气管哮喘的患儿58例,其中35例接受屋尘螨特异性免疫治疗为免疫组,其余23例予局部糖皮质激素治疗为药物组。于治疗前及治疗1年后分别测定患儿血清IL-4、IFN-γ和IL-13水平,并评估鼻部症状和肺功能。结果: 经过1年治疗后,免疫组鼻部症状评分较治疗前明显减少(P<0.05),与药物组相比有显著差异(P<0.05);免疫组因哮喘急性发作而急诊就诊的频率明显少于药物组;与治疗前比较,免疫组血清IL-4和IL-13水平下降,IFN-γ水平及IFN-γ/IL-4升高 (P<0.05),肺功能改善明显(P<0.05);而药物组血清IL-4和IL-13水平较治疗前无明显下降 (P>0.05),肺功能无改善 (P>0.05)。结论: 特异性免疫治疗后患儿血清IL-4和IL-13下调, IFN-γ及IFN-γ/ IL-4上调,提示特异性免疫治疗可能调节体内T辅助细胞(Th)Th1/Th2细胞的平衡,从而改善患儿鼻部症状和肺功能。     

The effect of natural pollen exposure on eosinophil apoptosis and its relationship to bronchial hyperresponsiveness in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis.

BACKGROUND: Limited data suggest that there is increased eosinophilic inflammation in the airways of patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR) during pollen season even if they do not have asthma. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of natural pollen exposure on inflammatory cells and apoptosis of eosinophils and its association with bronchial hyperresponsiveness (BHR) during and out of pollen season in SAR patients sensitized to only grass pollens. METHODS: Forty SAR patients and 10 patients with nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) from Ankara, Turkey, were recruited to participate in the study. Two induced sputum samples were taken from SAR patients during pollen season (May-June) and out of pollen season (November-January), but only 1 induced sputum sample was taken from NAR patients. Slides of induced sputum were evaluated by 2 cytologists with the use of light microscopy after cytocentrifuged and dyed with May-Grünwald-Giemsa stain. Induced sputum samples were sufficient for differential cell counts in 14 SAR and 7 NAR patients. RESULTS: Eosinophil counts in SAR patients were statistically higher in pollen season (19.4% +/- 16.2%) compared with out of season (4.6% +/- 6.9%, P = .003) and with NAR patients (4.7% +/- 9.5%, P = .01). The apoptotic eosinophil counts in SAR patients were statistically higher out of pollen season (3.0% +/- 4.5%) than in pollen season (0.38% +/- 0.80%, P = .02) and higher than those of NAR patients (0.14% +/- 0.26%, P = .005). The apoptotic ratio was statistically higher after pollen season compared with pollen season (0.720% +/- 0.394% vs 0.044% +/- 0.116%, P = .002). Blood eosinophil counts of SAR patients were increased during the pollen season (364 +/- 187/mm3) compared with out of season (278 +/- 219/mm3, P = .04) and with NAR patients (85 +/- 54/mm3, P = .001). The number of SAR patients who had BHR during the pollen season (7/14) was higher than the number who had BHR out of season (2/14, chi2 = 4.2, P = .04). CONCLUSION: Our data indicate that changes in eosinophil counts and eosinophil apoptosis may be related to the changes of natural pollen exposure and seasonal changes of BHR in SAR patients.     

Current immunological approaches for management of allergic rhinitis and bronchial asthma

A large population world over is affected with allergic diseases and asthma. Pharmacotherapy for allergic diseases and asthma is effective in controlling symptoms but on discontinuation of medication, symptoms reoccur. In contrast, immunotherapy modifies and corrects the underlying pathological immune responses in an antigen-specific manner. Immunotherapy shows an increase in IgG (blocking antibody) that competes with IgE for allergen, inhibiting the release of inflammatory mediators. Recent studies suggest that immunotherapy acts by modifying CD4+ T-cell responses either by immune deviation, T-cell anergy and/or both. Current immunological approaches for management of allergies and asthma involve immunization with native allergen, modified allergen, peptides/cDNA of allergen, anti-IgE, adjuvants coupled allergen, including immunostimulatory DNA sequences, cytokines, and bacterial products. These approaches modulate the immune response and are intended to give long-term benefit.